Campbell I agree with your statement. Although this new EPR approach is leading things in the right direction, we must acknowledge the most basic aspect of the whole system. If we are to reduce waste and environmental impact then water shouldn't be bottled in the first place. Unfortunately, Nestle and other bottled water companies developed a business model that did not account for the long term consequences of their products. Now they stand in a crucial moment of innovation or they risk losing the social legitimacy needed to survive.

Yes, Extended Producer Responsibility seems like a smart model. Encouraging to think of Nestle achieving the goals of 100% recycled bottles and capturing 100% of recyclable materials. Will keep my eyes open in the treasure hunt, and great to see businesses and individuals taking more responsibility for their waste.

While I appreciate and agree with the notion that we need a better model for recycling packaging, the author is missing a crucial first step. Before using 100% recycled bottles, use less bottles. The issue is packaged water; consumers need to recognize that, unless you are in an area where clean drinking water is not available (or really does not taste good), they should be drinking tap water, from a REUSABLE bottle, not one-time-use-and-throw-away-for-someone-else-to-deal-with bottle. For the most part, packaged water is tap water.

I agree Campbell. I think if a company that sells bottled water wants to do better that should be applauded though. I wouldn't think selling less bottled water would ever be a goal though of a company that sells bottled water. I'm stoked that there is thought going into creating %100 recyclable materials. But also there are a multitude variables that should be considered in the context of reducing waste. So that leaves the multitudes of solution opportunities. Maybe this is one. I like the idea of fixing things that are broken.